Hillary's Speech To Deutsche Bank: "The People Are Angry, She Isn't"

Friday's leaked release of Hillary Clinton's Wall Street transcripts by Julian Assange was the first evidence that even Hillary admitted there are two faces to the presidential candidate. As she admitted to the National Multi-Housing Council, "if everybody's watching, you know, all of the back room discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least. So, you need both a public and a private position."

Today, in the latest release of John Podesta emails we get further confirmation of the "double standard", not our phrase, John Podesta's, within Hillary's campaign.

In an email from Steve Hildebrand, a Democratic political strategist and the deputy national campaign director of Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign, to John Podesta, the strategist writes:

Hillary has got to get away from Washington speak and begin immediately to find an emotional connection to regular Americans. She needs to have a greater understanding of what people and families are going through every day. And, then she needs to find an emotional connection. This has to turn around now. Her speechwriters, ad writers, communication staff – she and President Clinton – all need to cut Washington rhetoric from their vocabularies and all scripts. She also needs to be bold and not be politically calculating. Americans and certainly primary voting Democrats are sick of the Clintons being cautious and calculating.

She can win this, but she’s got to find a way to connect with voters and stop worrying about Washington pols and press. The American people want to know if she gets them.

To which Podesta replies:

Thanks Steve. I am generally trying to get us aiming in the same direction. Bernie has gone decidedly negative and personal and like most things maybe he can get away with it. But we live with a double standard, so I think it's a mistake to follow him down that path.

Ah yes, the old "double standard" which however the media ignores in exchange for accusations what Trump may or may no thave done 36 years ago.

And in a separate email, Mandy Grunwald, a Democratic media advisor, when asked whether or not to release one of Hillary's paid Wall Streeet speeches to the public, namely one given to Deutsche Bank in October 2014, responds as follows:

I worry about going down this road.

First, the remarks below make it sound like HRC DOESNT think the game is rigged -- only that she recognizes that the public thinks so. They are angry. She isn't.

Second, once you start looking at speeches, you run smack into Maggie Haberman's report for Politico on HRC's Goldman Sachs speech, in which HRC isn't quoted directly, but described as saying people shouldn't be vilifying Wall Street. Maybe you think the Deutsche Bank speech takes the sting out of the Goldman report -- but I am concerned that the passage below will exacerbate not improve the situation.

And then there is this admission from the original speech writer:

I wrote her a long riff about economic fairness and how the financial industry has lost its way, precisely for the purpose of having something we could show people if ever asked what she was saying behind closed doors for two years to all those fat cats.

And that's why Hillary's relationship with the entity that makes the "American public angry" was never revealed until the Wikileaks release hit last week.

* * *

Here is the balance of the Deutsche Bank email thread for those interested in how Hillary planned on reconciling her Public and Private positions (link):

First, the remarks below make it sound like HRC DOESNT think the game is rigged -- only that she recognizes that the public thinks so. They are angry. She isn't.

Second, once you start looking at speeches, you run smack into Maggie Haberman's report for Politico on HRC's Goldman Sachs speech, in which HRC isn't quoted directly, but described as saying people shouldn't be vilifying Wall Street.

Maybe you think the Deutsche Bank speech takes the sting out of the Goldman report -- but I am concerned that the passage below will exacerbate not improve the situation.

Reviving this thread because AP is working on a story similar to Pat Healy's article in Sunday's NYT about HRC's "Wall Street image problem." The reporter, Lisa Lerer, plans specifically to note that her paid speeches to banks were closed-press affairs, and transcripts are not available. She is asking if we wish to characterize her remarks in any way.

I think we could come up with a vanilla characterization that challenges the idea that she sucked up to these folks in her appearances, but then use AP's raising of this to our advantage to pitch someone to do an exclusive by providing at least the key excerpts from this Deutsche Bank speech. In doing so, we could have the reporting be sourced to a "transcript obtained by [news outlet]" so it is not confirmed as us selectively providing one transcript while refusing to share others.

Following up on the conversation this morning about needing more arrows in our quiver on Wall Street, I wanted to float one idea. In October 2014, HRC did a paid speech in NYC for Deutsche Bank. I wrote her a long riff about economic fairness and how the financial industry has lost its way, precisely for the purpose of having something we could show people if ever asked what she was saying behind closed doors for two years to all those fat cats. It's definitely not as tough or pointed as we would write it now, but it's much more than most people would assume she was saying in paid speeches. (Full transcript is attached and key riff is pasted below.) Perhaps at some point there will be value in sharing this with a reporter and getting a story written. Upside would be that when people say she's too close to Wall Street and has taken too much money from bankers, we can point to evidence that she wasn't afraid to speak truth to power. Downside would be that we could then be pushed to release transcripts from all her paid speeches, which would be less helpful (although probably not disastrous). In the end, I'm not sure this is worth doing, but wanted to flag it so you know it's out there.

Deutsche Bank AG

Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton

New York, NY

Tuesday, October 07, 2014

...Now, Jacques was talking about Eleanor Roosevelt, and I hope a lot of you have seen the extraordinary Ken Burns documentary series on PBS about the Roosevelts. It's just riveting. And you should see it if you haven't, because it tells stories and shows pictures that have never been seen before of Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt and Eleanor Roosevelt.

But Eleanor Roosevelt in particular is someone that I admire as one of my predecessors, and I adore the book that Jacque's mother-in-law has written about the relationship that she and her late husband, who was Eleanor's personal physician, had with Eleanor Roosevelt.

And you look at the documentary and you really are struck once again how every generation has to do what it can to make sure that economic opportunity is broadly shared and upward mobility remains at the core of the American dream and experience.

I mean, Teddy Roosevelt said it well. His commonsense slogan, the square deal, captured the American imagination and still resonates today.

Just think about the changes that were going on at the turn of the last century: technological transformation, growing economic inequality, the steady accumulation of vast power and wealth in the hands of a select few.

Roosevelt was a Republican from the party of big business, but he resisted both the elites who sought to protect their gilded age advantages and the rising tide of populist anger that threatened to sweep the nation. Instead, he stood up for the level playing field, no special deals, just a fair shot for everybody willing to get out there and work hard.

I think that's a message worth recalling today when so many hardworking American families, and I add European families feel like they're falling further and further behind, while they see, in their view, the playing field becoming more unlevel, and feeling as though it doesn't matter how hard they work because the game is rigged against them.

Now, to me this is not just about fairness, although I think that's an important principle. We now know, based on research done by the IMF and others, that income inequality holds back growth for the entire economy. There is no more important driver of growth around the world than the purchasing power of American consumers. That is once again becoming clear as we move forward more dynamically than a lot of our friends and allies are economically.

Stagnating wages translate into fewer customers, and that's not a new insight. Just ask Henry Ford who first articulated it.

And it's no surprise that many Americans feel frustrated, some even angry, as you probably see in news coverage. And a lot of that anger has been directed at the financial industry.

Now, it's important to recognize the vital role that the financial markets play in our economy and that so many of you are contributing to. To function effectively those markets and the men and women who shape them have to command trust and confidence, because we all rely on the market's transparency and integrity.

So even if it may not be 100 percent true, if the perception is that somehow the game is rigged, that should be a problem for all of us, and we have to be willing to make that absolutely clear. And if there are issues, if there's wrongdoing, people have to be held accountable and we have to try to deter future bad behavior, because the public trust is at the core of both a free market economy and a democracy.

So it is in everyone's interest, most of all those of you who play such a vital role in the global economy, to make sure that we maintain and where necessary rebuild trust that goes beyond correcting specific instances of abuse of fraud.

Last year, the head of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Terry Duffy, published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that caught my attention. He wrote, and I quote, "I'm concerned that those of us in financial services have forgotten who we serve, and that the public knows it. Some Wall Streeters can too easily slip into regarding their work as a kind of moneymaking game divorced from the concerns of Main Street."

We heard a similar point from a more global perspective this spring at a conference in London on inclusive capitalism organized by my friend, Lynn Rothschild, who's here with us tonight. Mark Carney, the Governor of the Bank of England, offered what we in America might call straight talk about how the financial industry has lost its way and how to earn back public confidence.

And I think his words are worth both quoting and thinking about. Here's what he said. "The answer starts from recognizing that financial capitalism is not an end in itself, but a means to promote investment, innovation, growth and prosperity. Banking is fundamentally about intermediation, connecting borrowers and savers in the real economy. In the run-up to the crisis, banking became about banks not businesses, transactions not relations, counterparties not clients."

And then Mark Carney went on to outline proposals for stronger oversight, both within the industry and by government authorities, but he noted "Integrity can neither be bought nor regulated. Even with the best possible framework of codes, principles, compensation schemes and market discipline, financiers must constantly challenge themselves to the standard they uphold."

So this is a time when for all kinds of reasons trust in government, trust in business has eroded. And I believe that it has to be rebuilt, not only by those in offices in Washington or Albany but by so many of you.

Over the years, I've had the privilege of working with many talented, principled, smart people who make their living in finance, especially when I was Senator from New York. Many of you here were my constituents, and I worked hard to represent you well. And I saw every day how important a well-functioning financial system is to not only the American economy but the global economy.

That's why as Senator I raised early warnings about the subprime mortgage market and called for regulating derivatives and other complex financial products because even among my smartest supporters and constituents I never understood what they were telling me when they tried to explain what they were.

I also called for closing the carried interest loophole, addressing skyrocketing CEO pay and other issues that were undermining that all important link between Wall Street and Main Street.

Remember what Teddy Roosevelt did. Yes, he took on what he saw as the excesses in the economy, but he also stood against the excesses in politics. He didn't want to unleash a lot of nationalist, populistic reaction. He wanted to try to figure out how to get back into that balance that has served America so well over our entire nationhood.

Today, there's more that can and should be done that really has to come from the industry itself, and how we can strengthen our economy, create more jobs at a time where that's increasingly challenging, to get back to Teddy Roosevelt's square deal. And I really believe that our country and all of you are up to that job...

They've hardly been that; the bitch is rotten to the fucking core and these leaks leave no possible doubt of that. The problem is, the media not only manufactures, but reports on, the outrage over any such revelations. Since they won't inform the public of her true nature, and are purposefully ignoring those of us who've not only informed ourselves but gotten the word out to others, it looks as if it's all for naught.

Everyone who is sick of the status quo, but clings to their hipster-like disdain of "voting changes nothing, MAAAAAN," needs to understand that if HRC wins this one, they can take a nice long look in the fucking mirror, when they want to go pointing fingers and assigning blame.

"That's why as Senator I raised early warnings about the subprime mortgage market and called for regulating derivatives and other complex financial products because even among my smartest supporters and constituents I never understood what they were telling me when they tried to explain what they were."

I think she also warned Abe Lincoln not to go to Ford's Theater, warned Kennedy to stay away from Dallas, and for the defense forces at Pearl Harbor to be on the lookout for a Japanese attack on December 7th. No wonder her cattle futures trading went so well!

That she didn't, doesn't understand what they were telling her is not a shock.

KILLARY, you evil dumb bitch, YOUR HUBBY , the sexual predator along with his rapists and suckers-up STARTED the "reforms" that ended up in the stuff you are/were directing your triangulated fake outrage against , all the while you took every dime of the loot you could suck from them.

I weep for those not around when this traitor and her hubby were setting up this scam.

There is NO WAY anyone could vote for them.

You fukin traitor and cunt.

Die already and take that fake southern "first black prez" along with you.

You are the most disgusting and horrid excuse for a candidate that has ever ran.

To be honest, nobody cares about how dirty the system is. They merely want the person in who will give them more while sticking it to the other guys.

She is one dirty bitch though. She carries around more baggage than American Airlines.

This is sftrue

I had dinner with a banker freind on Friday, who was amazed I have never voted in my life, especially since he considers me one of the most politically informed people he knows (which is why I don't vote, obv).

He's more of the neoliberal type who blasts me for saying, "but who pays for single payer health insurance?", but yet when I retort, "but we give billions to Israel and the Saudis" dismissively goes, "I know, I know" and moves onto the next subject. He, and others in the top 20%, somehow have a hard time grasping that a corrupt Clinton presidency, while not as salacious as a Trump POTUS nom, will only bring the country into more and more decline and distrust which could bring about gripping fascism moreso than Cheeto Mussolini who says one thing, but will probably do another.

But the main reason why he, and most others in the top 20%, think shit is fine? Their portfolios are doing well. I suggested that the only thing that fixes this is unfortunately pain, in the form of the stock market crashing. But of course we all know that won't happen soon, thanks to the Fed's mirrors of illusion just so well off Baby Boomers and their Ivy League kids can feel better about themselves.

...yet when I retort, "but we give billions to Israel and the Saudis" dismissively goes, "I know, I know" and moves onto the next subject.

A lot of Americans don't really want to know or care and when you point that out to them they always go that they have a lot of good Jewish friends.

I am sure that there is a some salt of the earth type Jews who are being screwed like everyone else while some are genuinely appalled that that a lot of these ME wars are being done in the name of Israel. Why aren't they more vocal about it?

Why aren't they demanding that this madness stop? ..because they love Israel more than they love America. That is the harsh reality of it.

I am sure that there is a some salt of the earth type Jews who are being screwed like everyone else over there while some who are genuinely appalled that that a lot of these ME wars are being done in the name of Israel. Why aren't they more vocal about it?

Why aren't they demanding that this madness stop? ..because they love Israel more than they love America. That is the harsh reality of it.

That's a part of it; for many I'm sure that's true. But keep in mind, the Tribe is just that: a TRIBE. Anyone who breaks ranks will be banished. And Jews are taught from birth that every non-Jew in the world wants to make soap and lampshades out of them. Regardless of how appalled they might be at their Tribe's wretched, parasitic behaavior, they're not going to risk banishment.

It would take probably 50% of all American Jewish people standing together and screaming, "ENOUGH!" for anything to change. In other words, the Jews need some sort of Trump-like figure to rally around. And I'm sure I'm not alone in being unwilling to hold my breath waiting on that one.

Legendary Russian dissident and Nobel Prize recipient for literature, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, in a book called 200 Years Together “traced the Jews' colourful relationship with the Russian peopleand especially their role in the Bolshevik Revolution and its ensuing murderous tyranny.”

Writes the Irish Savant:

“He didn't pull his punches. He placed Soviet Jews centre place in perpetrating the worst mass murders of the 20th century…. Solzhenitsyn's own estimate for the number of Christians (his word) who died was 60 million.”

And note this, which is where America is today:

“He documented all of this in meticulous detail.... names, dates, times. But he did something else, something more insidious and dangerous. Something that had strategic international consequences for the Tribe. For a start he shone a light on the extraordinary Jewish capacity to magic themselves into the position of victimhood irrespective of their actual accountability. This in turn depended on - as he pointedly noted - their uncanny ability to seize control of media outlets. ‘There are pages of this history which one does not open without trembling. And these are the pages that are systematically and purposefully eradicated from the consciousness of the Jews.’“Other observations that cut to the bone included their practice of manipulating the legal framework to reflect Jewish interests. (Think "hate" legislation.)‘Russian people are now confronted by a Jew both as their judge and hangman. Why was it that anyone who had the misfortune to fall into the hands of the Cheka could count with high probability on standing before a Jewish investigator or being shot by a Jew?"

Is it any wonder then thatBerlin in the late 1920s and early 1930s, where 80 percent of the theater directors were Jewish who authored and produced 75 percent of the plays, earned the notorious title of Cesspool of Europe? At the same time, as in the United States, all the principal newspaper publishers and thirteen of the drama ctirics were Jews.

Is it any wonder then, that the United States, contrary to Hillary’s claim that “ America is great because America is good,” has become the Cesspool of the World? Never mind that she forgot the rest of de Toqueville’s quote: “If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.'

It's true. All those clowns don't have to live paycheck to paycheck. They don't go to the grocery store, so they don't see how much food costs have increased (like everything else has.) So, yeah, when they look at their portfolio, they think "everything is fine." When it dumps, they will jump out the window rather than face the consquences.

Long time ago now he wrote and article on how the USA during the Vietnam war blocked WHO, Red Cross and a whole host of other institutions from going into Cambodia. Oxfam the only aid charity in there and repember donating a penny a week to save the children.

Does the USA always do things like this ... nvm Syria kind of says it all. But to justify all the killing of children I chose to think there are enough children on the planet now, government are going to kill them anyway and sweet FA I can do about it.

Don't like that libtards? Go fuck yourself you pulled the trigger by supporting the likes of Clinton etc. for decades so you are 100% responsible. As you will be when Clinton gets elected too.